Journal cover Journal topic
Earth System Dynamics An interactive open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union
Journal topic

Journal metrics

Journal metrics

  • IF value: 3.769 IF 3.769
  • IF 5-year value: 4.522 IF 5-year
    4.522
  • CiteScore value: 4.14 CiteScore
    4.14
  • SNIP value: 1.170 SNIP 1.170
  • SJR value: 2.253 SJR 2.253
  • IPP value: 3.86 IPP 3.86
  • h5-index value: 26 h5-index 26
  • Scimago H <br class='hide-on-tablet hide-on-mobile'>index value: 22 Scimago H
    index 22
Discussion papers
https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-2019-4
© Author(s) 2019. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-2019-4
© Author(s) 2019. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Research article 08 Feb 2019

Research article | 08 Feb 2019

Review status
This discussion paper is a preprint. It is a manuscript under review for the journal Earth System Dynamics (ESD).

Biogeophysical impacts of forestation in Europe: First results from the LUCAS Regional Climate Model intercomparison

Edouard L. Davin1, Diana Rechid2, Marcus Breil3, Rita M. Cardoso4, Erika Coppola5, Peter Hoffmann2,6, Lisa L. Jach7, Eleni Katragkou8, Nathalie de Noblet-Ducoudré9, Kai Radtke10, Mario Raffa11, Pedro M. M. Soares4, Giannis Sofiadis8, Susanna Strada5, Gustav Strandberg12, Merja H. Tölle13, Kirsten Warrach-Sagi7, and Volker Wulfmeyer7 Edouard L. Davin et al.
  • 1ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
  • 2Climate Service Center Germany (GERICS), Helmholtz-Zentrum Geesthacht, Hamburg, Germany
  • 3Institute of Meteorology and Climate Research, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany
  • 4Instituto Dom Luiz (IDL), Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade de Lisboa, 1749-016 Lisboa, Portugal
  • 5International Center for Theoretical Physics (ICTP), Earth System Physics Section, Trieste, Italy
  • 6Helmholtz-Institut Climate Service Science (HICSS), Hamburg, Germany
  • 7Institute of Physics and Meteorology, University of Hohenheim, Stuttgart, Germany
  • 8Department of Meteorology and Climatology, School of Geology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece
  • 9Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l’Environnement; UMR CEA-CNRS-UVSQ, Université Paris-Saclay; Orme des Merisiers, bât 714; 91191 Gif-sur-Yvette CEDEX; France
  • 10Brandenburg University of Technology, Cottbus-Senftenberg, Germany
  • 11REgional Models and geo-Hydrological Impacts, Centro Euro-Mediterraneo sui Cambiamenti Climatici, Italy
  • 12Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute and Bolin Centre for Climate Research, Norrköping, Sweden
  • 13Department of Geography, Climatology, Climate Dynamics and Climate Change, Justus-Liebig University Giessen, Giessen, Germany

Abstract. The Land Use and Climate Across Scales Flagship Pilot Study (LUCAS FPS) is a coordinated community effort to improve the integration of Land Use Change (LUC) in Regional Climate Models (RCMs) and to quantify the biogeophysical effects of LUC on local to regional climate in Europe. In the first phase of LUCAS, nine RCMs are used to explore the biogeophysical impacts of re-/afforestation over Europe. Namely, two idealized experiments representing respectively a non-forested and a maximally forested Europe are compared in order to quantify spatial and temporal variations in the regional climate sensitivity to forestation. We find some robust features in the simulated response to forestation. In particular, all models indicate a year-round decrease in surface albedo, which is most pronounced in winter and spring at high latitudes. This results in a winter warming effect, which is relatively robust across models. However, there are also a number of strongly diverging responses. For instance, there is no agreement on the sign of temperature changes in summer with some RCMs predicting a widespread cooling from forestation, a widespread warming, or a mixed response. A large part of the inter-model spread is attributed to the representation of land processes. In particular, differences in the partitioning of sensible and latent heat are identified as a key source of uncertainty. In contrast, for precipitation, the representation of atmospheric processes dictates more directly the simulated response. In conclusion, the multi-model approach we use here has the potential to deliver more robust and reliable information to stakeholders involved in land use planning, as compared to results based on single models. However, given the contradictory responses identified, our results also show that there are still fundamental uncertainties that need to be tackled to better anticipate the possible intended or unintended consequences of LUC on regional climates.

Edouard L. Davin et al.
Interactive discussion
Status: open (until 27 Mar 2019)
Status: open (until 27 Mar 2019)
AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment
[Subscribe to comment alert] Printer-friendly Version - Printer-friendly version Supplement - Supplement
Edouard L. Davin et al.
Edouard L. Davin et al.
Viewed  
Total article views: 215 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total Supplement BibTeX EndNote
161 51 3 215 8 7 5
  • HTML: 161
  • PDF: 51
  • XML: 3
  • Total: 215
  • Supplement: 8
  • BibTeX: 7
  • EndNote: 5
Views and downloads (calculated since 08 Feb 2019)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 08 Feb 2019)
Viewed (geographical distribution)  
Total article views: 180 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 179 with geography defined and 1 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 
Cited  
Saved  
No saved metrics found.
Discussed  
No discussed metrics found.
Latest update: 22 Feb 2019
Publications Copernicus
Download
Citation